Legal Opinion
United States v. Massimino
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 25, 2019No. CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 09-00496-04PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge.
The Court has been asked to rule on whether Joseph Santaguida, an octogenarian and a retired lawyer who suffers from mid-severe dementia, should be required to testify at an evidentiary hearing concerning his representation of the defendant, *854Joseph Massimino, at trial over five years ago. ECF No. 1919.
The Court has considered Defendant's need for Santaguida's testimony, the probative value of that testimony, and the hardships that would be imposed on Santaguida. The Court finds Santaguida has met his burden to quash the subpoena. The Court will not compel…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1979
- In Re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings In Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1982
- Alexander v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lester Packer, Sr., Lester Packer, II and Shawn Dyroff, individually and on behalf of Glenn O. Hawbaker, Inc. Benefit Plan v. Glenn O Hawbaker, Inc., Board of Directors of Glenn O. Hawbaker, Inc., Plan Administrator of the Glenn O. Hawbaker, Inc. Benefit Plant, and John Does 1-20District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2026
- Vascular Access Centers, L.P.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022